fbpx

Bigfork Plan Change Criticized Again

By Beacon Staff

The Flathead County commissioners heard a familiar argument from Bigfork residents last week as they railed against a last-minute amendment made to the Bigfork Neighborhood Plan in June.

During a Sept. 1 meeting, residents accused the commissioners of circumventing the county planning procedure when they voted 2-1 to include a future land use amendment as part of the plan. The three parcels of land on Highway 83 were changed from an agricultural to a light industrial designation.

Members of the Bigfork Land Use Advisory Committee told the commissioners that they were concerned this amendment would set an unsavory model for the future.

“We really don’t want this to become a precedent,” said BLUAC member Al Johnson.

Johnson told the commissioners that the neighborhood plan is the result of thousands of hours of work and interpreting public opinion, and that this amendment negated the wishes of Bigfork residents. He then asked the commissioners to rescind their decision.

The designation change comes after the same request was denied by BLUAC, the county planning board and the commissioners more than a year ago. Property owner Mike Touris sued the county after that decision in a case that is still pending.

However, after the future land use map was amended, Touris reapplied for a zone change that would allow for industrial use on the land. County planning officials said the property owners had a history of non-conformance with zoning regulations.

The Flathead County Planning Board recommended approval of the resubmitted plan on Aug. 12.

At that meeting, planning board members expressed disappointment at the way the project had made its way back to their table.

“We send forward the recommendation we think is best for the community,” board member George Culpepper, Jr., said at the time. “We should be part of that process, after all, we are the ones you are now before asking for the change.”

This time, the board recommended approval with an emphasis on changing the land’s designation from light industrial to light industrial highway.

Board member Mike Mower was the only one to vote against approving the application. He said the zone change is still a bad idea and that there was nothing new in the proposal from the last time the planning board voted to recommend denial.

Mower was at the meeting last week to emphasize his disapproval of the amendment that slipped “under the wire.”

“It was fairly clear what the neighborhood plan said,” Mower said. “We shouldn’t validate sins of the past by carrying them into the future.”

County Commissioners Jim Dupont and Dale Lauman voted for the amendment in June. Commissioner Joe Brenneman voted against it and again voiced his concern at the meeting last week.

“The public process was circumvented very purposefully,” Brenneman said. “The commissioners in my opinion arbitrarily and capriciously decided, ‘Well, we’re going to change this map.’”

Lauman said he understood the amount of time and energy that went into the neighborhood plan and that he is still trying to get to the bottom of the issue. He said he has received calls and letters of support for the Touris project and questioned whether the real problem is a personality clash between opposing parties.

Shelley Gonzales, BLUAC chairman, disputed the notion that their concerns centered on personal vendettas. She said it was simply about following the county development process.

“We just expected the same from everyone,” Gonzales said.

Dupont was not at the meeting.

The commissioners also gave the go-ahead for a notice of public hearing on the zone change, at which Lauman said the public would have its chance to comment.